i think gameplay can be held over for another 6 months to a year while lack upgrades more forum stuff. The site lags on occasion so i think a lot of us would like that to be sorted aswell as improving game finder even more than he just did and ofcourse the big one usergroup leader powers.

Myself, I'd like to see Usergroup Leader powers instituted (as far as a suggestion that could feasibly be done soon). If nothing was off-limits, I'd say Adjacent Attacks, the 12-player increase, Paratroop Reinforcements, and Zombie Spoils are all neat ones that I'd love to see implemented.

As far as the Suggestions process goes, I'd say the gauging of interest in a certain suggestion (and the stickying of approval) doesn't seem to have any solid basis, other than the Suggestion mods' intuition. It would be nice to have at least an informative thread telling what is necessary for a suggestion to be stickied. That is not to say the Suggestions Team isn't doing a fine job - I mean, TFO kicks sugg butt - but it would be nice to have the comfort that their stickying is based on set guidelines.

rdsrds2120 wrote:Thanks for the input. Keep commenting on my bulleted points, and I'm going to add this one in there right now:

If you were to make an ordered top 10 list of Submitted Suggestions to be Implemented, what would it be?

-rd

My List1. Paratroop Reinforcements (it fills a gap in the current reinforcement options)2. Zombie Spoils (will change the way maps are played like Nuclear did)3. Integrate Map Rank4. Integrate Watch This Game5. Allow Assassin & Terminator to be game types available for team play6. Increase players to 12 (this would allow Assassin & Terminator to be played by 3 Trips or Quads teams)7. Remove Manual unique kills from everyone's figures for games on maps that didn't have Manual deployment8. Add a 'Tournaments Participating In' dropdown to Game Finder (similar to TO dropdown recently implemented)9. Add a Find All Active Games to a players profile10. Allow medals for ALL game options

rdsrds2120 wrote:[*]What are some outstanding problems that you see with the Suggestions process?

Lack of someone devoted full-time (or even part-time) to improving the website. We hear many promises of things that will be done soon or are in the pipeline, but they just aren't getting done. Suggestions are pointless when they take 3 years to implement.

rdsrds2120 wrote:[*]What are some outstanding problems that you see with the Suggestions process?

Lack of someone devoted full-time (or even part-time) to improving the website. We hear many promises of things that will be done soon or are in the pipeline, but they just aren't getting done. Suggestions are pointless when they take 3 years to implement.

Would you consider this to be pressure for lack to hire a web developer?

rdsrds2120 wrote:[*]What are some outstanding problems that you see with the Suggestions process?

Lack of someone devoted full-time (or even part-time) to improving the website. We hear many promises of things that will be done soon or are in the pipeline, but they just aren't getting done. Suggestions are pointless when they take 3 years to implement.

Would you consider this to be pressure for lack to hire a web developer?

-rd

That or do the job himself. The glacial pace of things changing on this website shows an unprofessional approach to meeting the community's needs. Some of the suggestions are very well thought out, well planned, and easy to implement.

Any more people have a list of things that they think should be done first? Any comments about the Suggs forum structure, etc? I'd really encourage people to list the add-ons that they want to see put in first and why, that would be interesting.

Why build any existing add-ons into the site at all? Why not focus on the things that have not been or cannot be provided by the community that have been suggested? That seems to me to be a more fitting use of a web developer's time than merging existing add-on scripts into the site's codebase.

jakewilliams wrote:Why build any existing add-ons into the site at all? Why not focus on the things that have not been or cannot be provided by the community that have been suggested? That seems to me to be a more fitting use of a web developer's time than merging existing add-on scripts into the site's codebase.

the reason i am proposing that some add-ons be implemented is because not everyone can use the browser they have been developed for. i will survive if they remain as they are it is just that i think they are so great they should be available to all.

Watch this Game is awesome for TO's and Map Rank for everyone wanting to know how far from a medal they are.

the only other one i use is Speed Turns so i can't comment on them other than to point out that i did not think any of them were worthy of adding-on in the first place.

1. Have the ability to know what the drop looks like in a fog game before your opponent starts his/her turn--at least know your starting positions. (not sure of any other game where you don't at least know how you started the game)

2. Have an add time button which you can use for all your games maybe once a week or once a month--maybe it adds 12 hours to each game for your turn.

3. Increase the tourney limit medals==30 is so ancient history.

4. Keep up the great work--CC is the best. I have tried two other sites and I didn't even finish the games because the sucked so bad .

We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a habit.

First, I think that we all agree that we would like to see more updates to the site. I am not talking about dozens of updates per year, but maybe 2 or 3 well thought updates. Maybe even 2 would be enough. Let's say Spring update and Autumn update. Each of those updates featuring a big main feature and several small features. That would make the site look a bit more professional. Imagine, a newcomer comes to the site and sees the list of past Autumn and Spring updates, and how each of those updates added a killer feature and several small features. That would encourage them to stay!

Second, with so few updates, why implement what is already available in the form of community add-ons? In my humble opinion this is both a way to waste the very scarce resources available and a way to piss the community members that spent their time doing that update. Apologies if that seems a bit unrespectful, but I imagine I would not feel very happy if I saw that the hours that I spent doing an add-on were useless because that add-on is now in the site. If the site had dozens of updates, that would be understandable. But it's difficult to understand that one of the few updates is exactly a mirror to something a community member already did.

Third, again with so very few updates, implement things that really make a difference. Don't add yet-another-spoil mode. Add things that bring a completely new dimension not present yet in CC! Like the Adjacent Attacks suggestion. It has been around so long and really would bring a new way of playing the site.

Fourth, XML. There are dozens of wonderful ideas in the Foundry about new maps. Unfortulately, they can't be developed because XML does not allow mapmakers to implement those ideas. For this reason I think that the site will greatly benefit from more XML updates. Just a few tag ideas that come to my mind in no particular order: Lighthouses for FoW, Dice Bonus, Reinforcement Only Borders, Game start messages, and, the biggest of them all, TRIGGERS.

I also agree that the Suggestions process is a bit obscure and not transparent at all (again, sorry if that offends someone. I say it with good intention. Not willing to criticize just for the sake of it, but pointing what I think could be improved) and that some feedback from time to time would be nice.